and north korea used close by north korea in july of 2016. we have to be clear when we are talking about, don't send public messages because we should send them in private, it is back to the you need to to tango. north korea is cutting off a lot of avenues. maybe that is the way to interpret the president's message, to not cross the line. we have to be careful describing it as a redline or the president painting himself in a corner. i think that is equally dangerous escalating rhetoric. we do not want a scenario where north korea feels like they must respond. we back to solutions here. what is congress's role in this situation particularly what you reference yesterday with the president? we have seen senator mccain critical of it and chuck schumer critical of it and others. what is congress's's role? ask thenk they will right questions about why we have the rhetoric and what is the strategy behind it. when we are talking about the policy, i know senators and congressmen have in asking the right questions about when the sanctions will be imple

but the consequences of a strike on north korea or of a series of coordinated strikes on north korea would be unimaginable in terms of the death toll. and the other fact here is that we know where some of the north korean's nuclear sites are, but i think the real concern that you will hear from military analysts are these so-called mobile road launchers, the mobile launchers that can launch icbms from anywhere in north korean territory. and so even if we know where the missiles are stored, where the nuclear warheads are stored, they can be transported somewhat easily especially if these reports of miniaturization are true. so even a military strike as has been contemplated as the defense department continues to plan for, it is not a guarantee that we would be able to eradicate north korea's nuclear arsenal which i think is a nightmare scenario for anyone who knows the potential of a conflict. >> i want to bring in retired colonel jack jacobs. let start there. what do you think our military options are here? >> well, there are very few. some people say we don't have any military optio

to destroy north korea's program and north korea told me that my face. prepared for war with north korea that's according to a u.s. senator it comes amid rising tensions between washington. is admit missing a deadline to deport a man suspected of committing friday's deadly knife attack in.

luxury items in north korea. elements of pop culture in from elsewhere, what is the situation, how important or relevant, given that the kim regime doesn't seem to place the economic well being of its people as a top priority, how relevant is it north koreans understand what is going on around them and what role their country is playing in this conflict? >> in the long run i think it is more than relevant. i think it is the key to the puzzle. first of all i completely agree with your assessment. we're dealing with a nuclear power. we tried to prevent that. we failed. that is reality. that is not going to change. that is situation in some respects resembles challenge we face in the cold war, albeit, much smaller, less scary scale. it's a problem we have to manage through a combination of diplomacy, deterrents and pressure through sanctions. but as important as all of those elements of that strategy are to preventing this thing from getting out of hand and protecting ourselves and our allies that is not how we're g

but north korea isn't syria. so you can't follow that same game plan with a north korea. you can't just, you know, strike an airstrip even with a nonnuclear weapon and then just see how it goes, right? you can't do that. >> fire and fury, right, is not a policy. i mean, again, this is the issue. what does that mean? you'll see. we'll see. >> it's a threat. >> right. how else can you take it? but then you have mattis and tillerson saying there's no change in the region. >> it could be nonnuclear, but does that matter? why would dow that? >> this is the problem with trump. even if he doesn't mean, nuclear, even if that was not his intent, reasonable people could think that. >> he did say very few countries have seen. >> like the world has never seen. >> yeah. >> but it only matters specifically, yes, i get china and i get this could be a great provocation to china to say as you said, we want stability more than anything else, so we will do "x" which they haven't done. that would be an amazing conclusion. it matters what north korea thinks. here's their statement. and their

korea if north korea took hostile action. that has been traditional american policy that we would respond with overwhelming force if north korea initiated a conflict and hostilities. but what the president did was dangerous, because it created this new possible red line, putting american credibility at stake, and i should say, brooke, when you engage in this war of words with the north korean leader, it actually enhances the north korean leader. this is exactly what kim jong un wants to see happen, and it diminishes the president of the united states. >> but the state department says he's speaking a language that pyongyang can understand. >> yeah, but the reality is the ambiguity in the president's statement is what created the problem here. because what the president essentially said was, if you threaten us, we will initiate overwhelming response with fire and fury. if that's what the president's saying, it creates a very new and different red line, and that's what's so dangerous about this. because as senator mccain and oth

and north korea intensifies. north korea threatens to hit jim mathis warns this could end in the destruction of its people. this after trump vowed to hit north korea with "fire and fury." we then look at how attorney general jeff sessions is using the justice department to roll back decades of progress. on civilil r rights,s, voting r, rights and reform. >>s s a whole, i i think, has bn unfairly maligned and blamed for an acceptable of a few bad actors. speak with the head of the civil rights division at the department of justice in the obama administration until january. all that and more, coming up. ♪ amy: welcome to democracy now, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy y goodman. the trump administration sent mixed messages wednesday over the possibility of nuclear war with north korea, as secretary of state rex tillerson sought to defuse tensions, while defense secretary james mattis threatened a nuclear attack. on wednesday, mattis warned north korea not to take any action that could result in

has it slow down north korea? do you think the latest round, ushered in by nikki haley at the could it slow them or stop them? guest: the most interesting thing about the vote is it was unanimous. unfortunately, i do not think it is the -- i do not think they can solve the problem. we have seen sanctions in the past. north korea has gone to a point where they have long-range missiles and nuclear weapons. it seems to me the biggest thing the sanctions can do is pressure north korea to sit down for talks to lower the temperature on the situation. my biggest concern -- once you get in a crisis situation where both sides are upping the ante where their actions are being naken, you can stumble into a accident that could start something disastrous. my hope is increased sanctions, along with efforts by russia and china, along with the united states, would help things cool down. host: let's go to ron in illinois, a republican. caller: good morning. thank you for your discussion. area --ndering in the how big a strike can

and north korea reaching a concerning new >>> north korea threatening the u.s. territory of guam in response to two american bombers flying over the korean peninsula. >> it represents the greatest crisis since the cuban missile cris crisis. >> u.s. intelligence officials have assessed that north korea has produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead. >> they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. >> what he was basically doing is threatening a nuclear war against north korea. >> it's important for our president not to be unpredictab unpredictable. >> by using this kind of language we're playing into kim jong-un's hands. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> this is "new day," wednesday, august 9, 6:00. chris has the day off. bill we're with us. >> seismic day. >> north korea is threatening to attack the u.s. territory of guam, home to andersen air force base in response to u.s. bombers flying over the korean peninsula on monday. this after president trump's extraordinary warning to pyongyang that any threat to the u.s. w

korea for the sake of denuclearizing or trying to do you know prize north korea but what he doesn't seem to understand is that he's playing with other people's lives what we should be talking about is the possibility that an attack probably a chemical warfare attack from north korea would kill between three and five million south koreans in the course of less than a day. now if that's the case what are we going to do to prod to try to prevent that the question is not whether we're going to lob missiles that are going to misquote the question of whether if we attack north korea what will they do in response and that's something that seems absent from our so-called diplomacy and from our so-called saber rattling thought so north korea now says tonight no more talking that they don't believe that they can negotiate with donald trump so how do we defuse this how does the world community diffuse this well it's how you don't diffuse it by putting out a statement that could have been written by north korea he's such a patsy he's such a fool north korea literally could have written the stat

and north korea. just a short time ago, rex tillerson saying quote, americans should sleep well at night. his comments just a day after president trump threatened fire and fury against the rogue nation. north korea countered making it's own threats to attack guam. home to 6,000 u.s. troops and 160,000 residents considered u.s. citizens. what are the options for the u.s. military in a situation like this one? joining me now, retired general barry mccaffrey. good to see you. we can start with the premise that all of know that any military option is not a good one. having said that. when you heard the president say fire and fury, did you consider it a threat of military action and when a president says words like that, what are our armed forces doing, if anything, to position themselves in the case they get called on? >> well, obviously very unhelpful comment by the president, you notice that tillerson and governor haley have made very moderate, sensible comments, they did organize a security counsel in

north korea has chosen the path it now finds itself on. that, at a minimum, will lead to further suffering for its own people, and at most, could prove to be status traffic for the whole world. -- past traffic for the whole world. it does not have to be this way. north korea should forgo the path of provocation, forgo the path of further escalation. there is no reason why the people of north korea cannot share the normal, prosperous life of their neighbors. the world would welcome, not threaten them. so in this chamber, let us once again call on north korea to halt and reverse its nuclear and missile development programs. let us once again call on them to prioritize well-being of there andle over legal and destabilizing military program. north korea's security and well-being do not depend on nuclear weapons. they do not depend on far-reaching missiles. they do not depend on a myth of self-sufficient defiance of the wider world. to live in constant tension with the world cannot be in the interests of north korea's regime, let alone its peop

and north korea. this is about two great friends, to great alliances, and it is in the breadbasket of the world, four of the five biggest economies in the world are centered out there and in one part of the discussion even have we posture what might happen in terms of preparation the first response from someone was the financial markets are going south immediately, and we all talk about that. we know that it's, in outbreak there would have a huge economic, financial impact globally. but to hear somebody say it as part of it, yes, we would expect and have a plan for this was a little bit jarring and probably a little bit more real given what's going on as recently as today with another test. >> you actually ended up taking a harder half of the question. >> well, i mean -- >> thank you. before we offer the audience a chance to weigh in, i want to ask about something i don't think you did address, and that is the significance of u.s. forward military presence in the western pacific. i want to get a japan

envoy from north korea. as this rhetoric is continuing between the white house and north korea, world leaders are beginning to ask both sides to slow it down. this is from the russian foreign minister saying, quote, unfortunately the rhetoric in washington and pyongyang is now starting to go over the top. we still hope an believe commonsense will prevail. my personal opinion is that when you get close to the point of a fight breaking out, the side that is stronger and clever ever ever should take the first step away from the threshold of danger. german chancellor said this escalating rhetoric is the wrong answer. sandra? >> sandra: what is the state department saying about its diplomatic efforts at this point? >> reporter: secretary of state rex tillerson has just returned from a trip to asia. the key was discussing north korea with allies to try to get allies and adversaries to cut off their relations, diplomatic and economic with north korea, called the pressure campaign. despite the fact north korea launc

and north korea. the u.s. always wanted other countries sitting at the table, if there were to be discussions or negotiations. the president is going toe to toe, whether for political or strategic reasons or whatever it is with kim jong-un. trading the same kind of rhetoric. >> what wore yries me is that t chinese have made their calculation that trump is bluffing and that the north koreans aren't going to commit suicide. therefore, the chinese don't mind seeing america wrapped and the axle of north korea, spending enormous resources to deal with it. that's fine with the chinese. that's why they've kept this alive all these years. putin doesn't mind, either. we have to be very careful. it is -- all the options are bad. but it may be the last bad option is living with a north korea, deterring them and keeping sanctions on until something happens. and just -- maybe it's a coup d'etat, but there can be worse things. as you recall, anderson, we're about the same able. we lived with tens of thousands of russian nuk

a response to the president's warning to north korea and north korea's threat to guam. after months of stocks coasting to records, investors are showing some signs of caution. for example, gold, a typical safe haven, rising more than 1% to a two-month high. and wall street's fear gauge is up 21% this week. the vix index had previously been a historically low level. the u.s. dollar, once a safe bet in the global economy, down 8% this year. >>> remember that incident where united airlines forcibly dragged a passenger off a flight? the fallout from all of that is causing big changes industrywide. passengers being bumped from flights was at a record low last quarter. the 12 largest airlines bumped only 44 out of every million passengers. that's the lowest rate in 23 years of data. airlines typically oversell seats to make up for passengers who don't show up for flights. however, since the united airlines debacle, they've changed policies to make sure people give up seats voluntarily. >>> after google's crisis and the memo suggesting women are not biologically fit for tech r

president trump has doubled and tripled down on his threats against north korea and the north korean leader, kim jong-un, saying initially on tuesday that fire and fury would be set upon north korea if the threats continued and then later saying that that threat wasn't even strong enough. yesterday during a really free-wheeling question-and-answer session with reporters, president trump said this about north korean leader kim jong-un. >> and if he utters one threat in the form of an overt threat, which by the way, he has been uttering for years an his family has been uttering for years, or if he does anything with respect to guam or any place else that's an american territory or an american ally, he will truly regret it and he will regret it fast. >> reporter: so while china may be asking let's cool tensions down, that certainly wasn't what president trump did yesterday, that bellicose rhetoric that he's been using throughout these tensions has continued. what we saw yesterday was some pretty strategic shifts. president trump took over 50 questions from reporters over the last 48 hou

against north korea. stop their wargames and the rhetoric. it china also saying that yesterday, while they oppose the north korea's missile and nuclear programs, they won all relevant parties to stop provoking each other with a and sanctions, according to beijing. they say it is not the answer. , we willtephen engle come back to you for an update. despite widespread anger at the missile, president trump has toned down his usual fiery rhetoric. let's get the next from a senior editor live in washington, d.c. the president dealing with multiple crises, not as internationally, but must agree, with what is happening in texas with tropical storm harvey. could we see a measured response from the white house? >> yes. this was brought about after a meeting last night at the white house, with rex tillerson. launcher does undercut that suggestion coming out of washington last week, that tough talk had been bringing some results. you remember trump said that startingorth korea was to respect the u.s. and the secreta

him we appreciate north korea -- twice in a row, essentially rest the notion that north korea's interested in any -- de-escalation. that will force them into a different response in previous weeks. +++ face of u.s. warnings sending a missile to guam. should we look at it in that way, but at that korea backed up sending a missile in that direction? >> i would be wary of looking at it that way. it is still a pretty provocative action. the issue and what we have seen is that the u.s. is looking to declare victory system what north korea have not done in recent weeks. when north korea does something, it changes the cap list. president trump's's remarks that all options remain on the table is more of the same, but i would expect the response going forward to really focus on what the secretary of state rex tillerson has laid out, ramping up pressure on allies come on china to enforce sanctions, been really trying to box north korea into a corner and squeezed economically. wille un security council hold a meeting on north korea today. obviously, this includes china and the russian federation as ,

secretary tillerson repeated as relates to north korea. he's repeated his call for opening talks with the north if it stops testing missiles. the messages from leaders are all over the place. james mattis issued a harsh warning to north korea saying the dictator kim jong-un would lose any arms race with the united states. in a statement today, secretary mattis also said north korea should cease any consideration of actions that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people. moments ago, reporters asked the state department spokeswoman about the seemingly conflicting statements from the trump administration. >> i think the united states and some of you may disagree with us, but the united states is on the same page. whether it's the white house, the state department, the department of defense, we're speaking with one voice. the world is in fact speaking with one voice. >> i want to show you in our wall a look at the possible ranges of a north korean strike based on a missile test that happened last month. defense exp

because it would destroy north korea's program north korea told me that. the united states is preparing for war with north korea that's according to what comes amid rising tensions between washington and pyongyang.

michael: they play into north korea and north korea's strategic mindset. they can point to this as being belligerent rhetoric coming from the united states. it does raise tensions, but there is nothing other than a love commentary and statements. -- a lot of commentary and statements. the testing announcement, there is nothing tangible other than rhetoric. sarah: let's dig down into what is tangible, because the president met with his top security officials. what options are on the table for the united states' side? michael: the united states now has sanctions, legislation passed last week. the united states can conduct very surgical and tough sanctions on north korea, financial institutions, a power they did not have before. there is diplomacy, diplomacy they can undertake, and there are military options, but right now there is no proof whatsoever the united states is undertaking any policy indicating military action or preemptive lee terry action. there are things we could see we have not seen. sarah: what would we see? are you concerned this could be a

korea, diplomatic relations with north korea, it is time you cut that out. he made the same case in thailand earlier today, that is a country where north korea has an embassy, a country the state department says has very lax visa rules, allowing north korean officials to go in and set up shell companies there, all of that to playing into that this diplomacy rex tillerson is conducting right now. >> jon: as ominous as this news is as concerned as we are, it is even more concerning for the immediate neighborhood, places like south korea, japan and the philippines, they must be absolutely apoplectic and i can only imagine that there is a serious effort underway between diplomats in those countries to come up with some resolution. >> absolutely and that is also part of the case the united states is making here. as north korea continues to develop its weapons programs and continues its missile programs, the case you can make to china here is that these other nations in your backyard, south korea, japan, they start to seek their own their own weaponization to defe

and north korea. was not mentioned by the critics tonight is that the president and nikki haley succeeded on saturday in bringing together a coalition to unanimously slap a new on north korea. the administration is still working diplomatic channels but it had not yet come close to stopping the threat on north korea. sean. >> sean: ed henry ed henry. it joining us now from the pentagon, lucas tomlinson. lucas, was the latest there? >> sean, the explosive report largely echoes what a top u.s. air force officer said said back in 2015, it's never shown that they could take a warhead and have it successfully reenter earth. in the last month, north korea has demonstrated to intercontinental ballistic missile test. each one now putting the united states in range. the first, it went 1700 miles into space and flew for 39 m@n.@%@-the second on july 2, 2300 miles into space and was in the air for 45 minutes. the longest a farthest missile test. seven times higher into space and the orbit of nasa's international

well, north korea responded as north korea does, through its state media, kcna. as you said, it state that the u.s. would suffer shameful defeat and final doom if it pursues extreme military sanctions and pressure. here in seoul, south korea's national security adviser spoke to his counterpart, h.r. mcmaster. they spoke about working closely together, as they do. obviously south korea, one of the united states' closest allies. at a time like this, south korea definitely needs the u.s. reiterating really the closeness and need for transparency in working together to try and ease tensions here on the korean peninsula. also we've learned that u.s. defense secretary jim mattis, when he was asked about the united states' readiness and what action may be taken, military or not, he responded by saying, "i don't tell the enemy in advance what i'm going to do. our readiness -- we are ready." as for the joint chiefs, chairman general joseph dunnford, he's on a scheduled trip to the region, going through hawaii, south korea, japan, as well as china, where of course north ko

will back north korea if we strike north korea first. what should we deal with china now? what should we be doing with them. they may hold the key to all of this. we're on it for you after this. the u.s. needs to develop more renewable and clean energy resources because there are limits to the amount of fossil fuels that we can burn. since 1925, we have depended on diesel generators, burning approximately a million gallons of diesel fuel a year. we're going through an energy revolution. our mission is to make off-shore wind one of the principle new sources of energy. not every bank is willing to get involved in a "first of its kind" project. citi really stepped up when we needed them. citi saw the promise of clean energy and they worked really closely with us, financing the first off-shore wind farm in the united states. the wind farm will lower power prices. we're polluting the air less. businesses and homes can rely on a steady source of power. block island wind farm is a catalyst this will be the first of many off-shore wind farms in

states and south korea did in north korea. this is debatable. one point that needs to be mentioned is that who is ultimately responsible for the start of the korean war? this is something that in china this is still not taught, but there is absolutely incontro veritable evidence that the korean war started because kim il-sung and stalin sat down and had conversations and planned it, and if you want further evidence, i strongly suggest that you look at the woodrow wilson center, one of my former students by is in the audience, james person, one of the leading experts in the country on international documentation about the korean war, and i think the evidence of this, how the war started in the first place, and who bears ultimate cholesterollal cuppability is very clear. >> i -- very briefly. from the little i know, greg is completely correct that the south koreans don't think it's a big new deal. they're kind of used to that. for 70 years. i'm not sure it's true for japan. i'm not sure it's true for guam. and so we need to go b

north korea today, a show of defiance. the u.s. the enemy, kim jong-un and their weapons against the threat of president trump. >> fire and fury, like the world has never seen. >> reporter: and from the island of guam, now directly threatened by north korea, secretary of state rex tillerson, turning down the temperature. >> the american people should sleep well at night. >> reporter: and defending the president. >> what the president is doing is sending a strong message to north korea in language that kim jong-un would understand. because he doesn't seem to understand diplomatic language. >> reporter: that message reinforced today in another stark warning from defense secretary jim mattis that north korea should stop considering actions that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people. it would, he said, lose any conflict it initiates. mattis' comments followed a new, very specific threat from north korea, that it's preparing military plans to strike the american pacific island of guam. it's a sov

tonight north korea put on notice. defense secretary james mattis warning the regime away from any attack on the u.s. the dprk should cease any consideration of actions, mattis said in a statement, that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people. the comments appeared to be part of a delicate walk-back of president trump, surprisingly belic belicose and the north on tuesday. >> they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. >> reporter: overnight rex tillerson fought to calm fears as he went to asia. >> nothing i've seen suggests the situation has changed in the last 24 hours. i think america should sleep well at night. i have no concerns about this particular rhetoric of the last few days. >> reporter: this morning the president put an even finer point on his fire and fury comments, touting u.s. capabilities on twitter. my first order as president was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal. it is now far stronger and more powerful than ever before. in fact, trump h

and north korea where north korea has its weapons lined up. again, they can attack the region at any time if they want to. they know they would face incredible repercussions. that's the only thing that would be holding them back. but given the heightened tension on the peninsula, heightened security concerns, we are hearing calls from the president of south korea for the country to up its defense capabilities and capacity, similar sentiments echoed by lawmakers in japan. officials here are trying to lower the tension in the region. they haven't responded directly about the incendiary comments made by president trump, pointing the finger at pyongyang, calling for calm there and said north korea created the problem here. alisyn. >>> if u.s. intelligence assessments are accurate, north korea is on a fast track to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power. the reclusive regime has purportedly produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that could fit inside a missile capable of hitting the u.s. mainland. cnn's barbara starr has more on their advancing cap

the heck out of north korea. there is a lot of opportunity. we sanctioned one banker from china recently, but there is a whole lot more they're doing business here and we should be going after china hard. we should demand that they play ball i north korea. as far as rhetoric goes, this is a crazy man, he might as well know that we can do what we say we do in terms of the rhetoric itself. there is nothing wrong with conveying what we have. we don't want to get to that state, but if he doesn't know that we are serious, then he will not take us seriously. this is been the whole problem. >> pete: that's why doubling down on sanctions at this point, and may help bring china along, but it won't solve things. how many miniaturized nukes he has -- if you give up your nukes, you die in a ditch. he gave up the nukes after the iraq war and that's what happened. stopping them before they get them can proliferate them, it's so critically important. i go back to around because iran is even worse. they're cohabiting with north

security council against north korea so that we can get north korea to come to the bargaining table and give up their nuclear weapons. >> woodruff: senator, i'm sure you heard the president makes the argument the united states let north korea get away with its tough rhetoric for years, let it get away with this nuclear build-up. we see what the result is and the president saying it's time for someone to stand up for the american people in his words. >> well with, it is time to enforce sanctions and that means for china -- china doesn't want north korea to become a nuclear weapons' state. what china wants to do is potect the communist regime on its border, so the united states needs to work with china to indicate this is not about regime change for north korea. it's about changing their course on nuclear warfare and that's an area with china that would agree with the united states. china could guarantee north korea its regime but it must change its course on its nuclear policies. that's what we need to negotiate. there's a way forward -- if we rely on military, the risk factors are so gr

there is no military solution for north korea. we do not want to:occupy north korea. so we need to figure out -- trish: wait a minute. you say there is no military solution. i would different with that because i think the alternative is not an alternative acceptable 250 anyone in this country. you are in an us versus them situation. we are not going to allow them to be able to take out us. they are about 12 to 1 month as away. ross, if you are not taking that threat seriously, i don't know if i can take you seriously. >> we have taken the threat seriously for a decade now. but i'm saying we are not going to have a nuclear exchange with north korea and have that work out very well. we have to come up with a diplomatic exclusion. every war we fought for the last 50 years have been pretty difficult on the u.s. population and our people. you have to think about the consequences of these discussions. i don't think after iraq and vietnam we want to get into another conflict. trish: if we get into a conflict it will be in a big way and ugly way. >> and it will be bad for thi

korea, about north korea. they were upset to find out that i had brought in something disturbing to them. this is why i was arrested, not because of what i was doing before. one writer has drafted fascinating books about teaching english to the north korean elite. she has considered your case and said that basically, you did things that were not allowed by the regime, and you got punished accordingly. that you sort of brought this upon yourself. would you accept that? i made a mistake by carrying a portable hard drive into the country, but when they realised i brought people to pray and worship inside north korea, they took it as a hostile act to themselves. they did, they accused you of all sorts of crimes, but it boiled down to plotting to overthrow the government. that is why you were sentenced to 15 years hard labour. overthrowing the government by prayer and worship, that was the charge. take me back to that moment, i believe it was 2013 when you were sentenced. you had had a lot of interrogation by that

what exactly does north korea want? if we were to go to the table and start negotiating with them, what would that look like? >> well, i think that we underestimate what they want. we're looking at it from a u.s. perspective. in intelligence we call this mirroring, when you assume the adversary wants what you would want if you were them. i think most of all what they want besides regime security is honor as they see it on their own terms. and i think it would be very unpalatable to americans to give that to them. and i think the key that's going to happen here if we don't want a military solution is that we will all turn to china to bro r broker -- this has been going on for a while. we can't ignore what china's doing in the south china sea. they certainly see themselves as a regional hegemon for asia and around the world. they could exploit this for a gain. i think u.s.-north korea dialogue may not go very far. >> jonathan, any sense that this white house is going to be willing to go to the table with them? you just he

north korea best not make any more threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. good morning, it's wednesday, august 9th. also this morning: an extra 500 medical school places in england are confirmed.

fight with north korea. korea but talk to the united -- the north koreans, my understanding is they want to not talk to south korea but talk to the united states directly. if these talks were to happen, that this came up in this conversation, what is the end point? be about andey what would be on the table? again, my understanding is that the north koreans their ultimate , goal is for the united states not to be on the korean parents a lot, that they be accepted as a country. or if there is some kind of unification that there be two systems for the korean peninsula and i'm interested in hearing are these complete nonstarters? , is there any gray area, or area where these things can be talked about ? >> i think they are nonstarters, notwithstanding former white house advisor steve bannon's abrasive one north korean position which is we might pull our troops out of south korea if they clampdown the missile program. i think that would be a nonstarter. i think, one country two systems would be a nonstarter. virt

or ugh into north korea. we can that is one way influence the north korea people n the ground, getting outside information in there. the reason it influences them is because that information shows are getting and it is incorrect and wrong. host: can the u.s. government a larger role in doing that or are these outside groups talking about sort of the best way to do that right now? uest: i think the way that the united states government can help is by providing some some of the groups doing that work. rights act, up, again, for renewal this year, i think can provide good way for set aside grant money for the organizations doing good work. more calls, gus, line for republicans, go ahead. yes, good morning, thank you for c-span, i really appreciate the show so much. i'm just wondering how this guy power.sibly stay in he sounds like he's a totally nut job, if you will. his people d practically starve to death, hey don't have enough food and i really like the idea of the adio broadcasts, you know, if shine and ligh

is it north korea? >> right now i think it's north korea. i think the other part is just the lack of stability arranged the world. whether you look at syria. whether you look at the issues in africa and veans an venezueld the philippines. you can't take your eye off it right now. the united states needs to lead. it doesn't mean lou action but d voice. brian: how do you view it as you sit at the united nations. >> we just passed one of the strongest resolutions in a generation against north korea. if you look at syria, we basically put assad in his place. use chem weapons. we are continuing to work with all the parties there to bring stability. i'm going to africa in october to make sure we are continuing to build our africa policy to work on the famine the political issues. we are anywhere and everywhere which is what the united states does. when we lead, people follow. steve: you know who agrees with you on syria is the "the washington post." they head a headline under trump gains against isis has dramatically accelerated. that's what we wa

north korea is urging the u.s. not to regret today in the future and the operational plan to be soon reported to the supreme commands. they are in process of deciding what to do. it is concerning it is worrisome. the idea that north korea is seriously considering a strike to strike -- a extra injure to strike guam. to me i feel like what are the next steps and what do we do to protect mayor chance in guam and elsewhere. >> we have to keep investing in missile defense at sea and on land. we are doing that but we need to continue investment in missile defense and technology. we need to keep pressuring china. 90% of north korea's trade volume is with north korea. 237 it's a leaky border between north korea and china even when there are sanctions. gerri: dow jones reporting north korea makes rare explicit specific threats on guam. it looks like this reporting is true. >> whether the north koreans choose to act is another matter. but the point made by your two other speakers is right. china controls 90% of all the food

the president is sending a strong message to north korea in the kind of language that north korea understands. the secretary has talked in the past about how the president is very effective spokesman. people listen to him. those were the president's words, sending a message loud and clear to north korea. >> does that mean, this is my last one. >> yeah. >> does that mean you came to the determination, the only way to get through to kim jong-un is with same kind of bombastic rhetoric? >> there are lots of ways we believe to get through to kim jong-un and his regime. our issue is not with the people of the dprk. it is with the regime itself. that message is strongly sent throughout the administration. when the president, secretary mattis and secretary tillerson agreed the top security issue for the united states would in fact be safety and security of americans, first of course, would in fact be dprk, and destablizing activities, illegal nuclear ballistic weapons programs that continue to take place. a few more questions about this. >> thanks. so in the president's remarks, then in the secretary

>> well, that's up to north korea. the united states isn't going to do anything other than respond to whatever north korea does so the difficulty is with the guy running north korea, you don't know what he's going do. something happened today that seems to have slipped through the cracks in the media and that is that china stunningly said they would not defend north korea if indeed they took first action and the u.s. responded. that's something that nobody has ever heard before and if i were in north korea, boy that would make you run for cover. we've always been under the chinese umbrella and they've said "you're on your own." >> they also said, the chinese state-controlled newspaper the global times said if the u.s. and south korea strike first against north korea china will take action. and the global times newspaper said if north korea launched missiles first, this is a china-controlled newspaper, china would remain neutral which is different than what you just said. are you confident that china is playing ball and

north korea if necessary. is that something you think would be a good idea? >> well, listen, i think that comes with a lot of risk, as you reported. what happens to seoul, south korea, in north korea then responds. what i think is refreshing is we have some of the brightest military strategists in the world that work for the u.s. military and advise the u.s. president. i think the president now is going through every different situation to make sure we can stand down this north korea threat. and one of them is a pre-emptive strike. we have to look at facts on the ground and advice from our military leaders. >> did president trump draw a red line with north korea when he stated earlier in the week that if north korea made anymore "threats," they will be met with fire and fury, his words, like the world has never seen. north korea, you know, responded last night with a threat of its own saying they will launch four intermediate range ballistic missiles over japan aimed towards the u.s. territory of guam. by mid-

and north korea going on. happened, is this that an indication there is nothing behind the scenes going on at the moment? >> it is possible, but i don't think so. it was close, you would not know about it. i think it is likely, but i korea access an integrated actor. missile launches is the way various release compete against each other. there is no breakthrough that anyone can see, so threatening japan along the way is in the context of the current exercises at the time when people are worried about america striking north korea. i don't see any reason why these two things can't be happening at the same time. >> we often talk about nuclear programs as threats, but they also act as great deterrence. in a way, north korea is basically saying if you attack us, we will go full throttle. when it comes to conventional weapons, south korea is a chess piece easily taken by north korea, but what i don't understand is why retaliate with japan? is this trying to draw in the u.s. to come in closer to take it out? >> i thi

and, of course, north korea has nothing like that. >> well, north korea could have 30, maybe 60 nuclear bombs. they may have miniaturized those bombs on war heads, on inter-continental ballistic missiles. i have to take a break, but very quickly, how many nuclear bombs do you believe north korea right now has? >> you know, as you know, wolf, i wouldn't be at liberty to say that. i do have an assessment of that, but i can't -- it's obviously classified. >> all right. stand by, senator. there's more we're going to discuss. we are following the breaking news. and as you correctly point out, this is an extremely ominous situation that the u.s. and its allies are facing right now. we'll be right back. i like russo. his on/off splits are the best here. yeah, but his offensive win shares didn't even break 4. come on, check out that stop-and-pop! what do you think? my trade-off analytics indicate no one creates more space on offense. this allows him to nail a jumper from a densely populated urban area. what you're trying to say is from way downtown? i am still learning. i can see that. i am sti

no one out north koreas north korea. he can say whatever he wants, but north korea will make him pay. >> let's bring bill in for a second. it's important to note, because i have heard from some people, while all this coverage is scary, it's ramping things up and some have said it reminds them of before the iraq war, all the warmongering going on. it's important to note that actually i haven't met anybody who has said that the united states should bomb north korea or that this is a good idea or will really show them. in fact, where you are in south korea, the new president who was lel elected in may has taken a different view. he feels that while they need the missile defense system now and south korea is always on high alert, that there is still a negotiating avenue ahead of us. >> reporter: absolutely right, there was a statement from president moon's office this morning. calling on north korea once again to stop its provocations. but every time they say that, they add that the door to dialogue is still open e. and pres

and north korea. a war of words. fire and fewer aagainst north korea. let's look -- fury against north korea and the question of the day. do you support president trump's strong statement to north korea about meeting their threats with fire and fury? i 29% of you say yes and if you can find north korea should pray this is resolved by diplomacy. >> what do you see? >> interesting. jim tweeted me saying have you looked at his body language and if you can analyze it to see if he is serious or not. >> i got a three-word response. no -- hell no. >> well thanks for talking to us. using our hashtag. we will discus this throughout the afternoon news cast for sure. >> weather is foggy today. i like it -- >> all over. >> but steve said it will be sunny by this afternoon. >> for some that is correct. >> pretty good strong push on the fog for areas. the inland had a big fog bank; and san carlos has the best weather. but don't tell -- tell anyone. i know san cor lose is in there and look at that fog bank it is large and in charge and getting helped by that guy. that